On your first point: I am aware the tour for 'Raising Sand' was already in the works. However, he seemed receptive to something Zep related after the completion of that tour. But when the tour ended he went back to not having any interest in the Zeppelin thing and was eager to do a follow-up record with Alison. Which is fine. I loved that record and all Robert's other solo efforts. The point I'm trying to make is that he should not get fans hopes up (not mine personally cause as I've said I don't need a Zeppelin reunion.) I understand why some Zep fans get really frustrated with Robert. If the Zeppelin chapter is closed, stop talking about it or saying stuff like 'You never know what's around the corner' until something more definitive is decided.
Secondly, I disagree about the Unledded thing. I mean yes, the Egyptian musicians added a different element to the songs but I still felt the essence of Zeppelin in those songs. Even when they were drastically changed. The versions of 'Black Dog' and 'Whole Lotta Love' in recent tours were...not that great. Personal opinion. Others, as I mentioned above worked much better.
Lastly, a covers album is a covers album. And you're right not ALL covers but predominately covers. The point isn't obscure songs vs. The great American songbook. He doesn't need to make that quip about Rod...even if his cover album is a lame cheesefest. Rod's just doing his thing and keeping himself busy...just like Robert. He needs to stop with the personal jabs at other artists.

I adore Robert Plant. I have all his solo material and have always supported the musical paths he's taken over the years. If he never reunites with Jimmy, JPJ and Jason that's okay with me. If I need my Zeppelin fix there is plenty of material for me to enjoy. I agree he doesn't owe fans anything more. The man sung nearly four hours every night in the Zeppelin days and gave his all. He was definitely earning his bread.
If they were to reunite for any sort of tour, I don't think anyone will disagree that Robert's role would be the most difficult. He's still one helluva singer but he is definitely NOT the bare-chested wailing Golden God of the past. The footage I've seen from the O2 show was incredible and Robert was in tip top shape that night. That being said, there were times when Robert had to sing in a lower register and although it was great there was also a spark missing. This is when I agree with him when he says it can never be Led Zeppelin again. That and Bonzo's absence, of course. Even if they were to fill that drum stool with the best drummer they could find, it would be a great show by Jiimmy Page, JPJ, Robert Plant and this amazing drummer (whomever it might be.) It's not Led Zeppelin. They can't recreate that magic. Ever.
I don't think he means any harm with his comments towards any of the other members or Jason. But my biggest complaint with Robert is what a few people have already mentioned. He contradicts himself in every interview I read. After the O2 it seemed he was more open to the possiblity of working with the Jimmy and JPJ and possibly creating new material. Next time I heard from him he was about to embark on a tour with Alison Krauss and said he was finished with Zeppelin. It's just recently that this flip-flopping has begun to irritate me. He says he's finished with Zeppelin but his solo shows seem to have more songs from his Zeppelin days then his solo career. He's aware that's what folks want to hear and he falls back on the Zep material to garner interest for his solo shows. Some Zeppelin material works great ('Hey Hey What can I Do,' 'Battle Of Evermore' with Krauss, and 'That's The Way') are a few I've heard in the last few tours that were incredible because he didn't try to change them so drastically.
He said in the past he was too old to be going around stadiums singing 'Black Dog' and yet in his past few tours he's sung a re-worked version that is barely recognizable. Altering the song doesn't mean you're doing a different song so if he's going to sing 'Black Dog' I wish he'd stick as close to the original as possible. It's a raunchy rock song. Sing it with that attitude of the past even if your voice isn't as powerful as it used to be. Or don't sing it at all. I'd rather hear 'Calling To You,' 'Come Into My Life,' 'Great Spirit,' 'Little By Little,' 'Slow Dancer,' or any other solo song. Whenever he tours, it's always material from the current record and Zeppelin favourites. Why not more solo Robert stuff? If including Zeppelin is for the sake of the Zep fans that come to the shows why not then get together with Jimmy and JPJ and tour? Afterall, it's what fans want to hear, right? He really hasn't distanced himself from Zeppelin at all. In fact, he relies heavily on it when he tours.
So he was recently interviewed for a Toronto newspaper and he commented that Roger Waters was in town performing songs from 'The Wall' and in a roundabout way being such a hypocrite saying doing that over and over becomes a prison etc etc. Sorry Robert, but you doing Zeppelin songs in your solo tours? Couldn't someone say the same about you? Years back he made a another comment about Rod Stewart and him doing covers to sell records nowadays. Now I'm not a Rod Stewart fan but aren't 'Dreamland,' 'Raising Sand' and the new 'Band Of Joy' cover albums?
I want Robert to do whatever makes him happy. I will always support his work and attend his solo shows. But enough with the snarky comments, hypocrisy and the holier than thou attitude.

To the hardcore Zep fans everything mentioned is a trademark. But I'd have to say The double-neck guitar is the one that is most memorable. A friend of mine sees that guitar and she always says, "The Jimmy Page guitar!"

Steve Vai is one hell of a player! I know some are put off by his on stage grandeur but I think that's just part of the Steve Vai experience. He has got the talent to back it up so the crazy outfits, and the fan blowing his hair wildly about etc...doesn't bother me in the least.
Those unfamiliar with his body of work think he's just another one of those "shredder" type of players but if you've followed his carrer from beginning to the presesnt you know what a well rounded player he is and that he is much more than a "shredder."
Also worth mentioning: that a friend of mine met him before a show once and says he's one of the nicest people he's ever met.
Favourite record: Passion & Warfare
Favourite Songs: For The Love Of God, The Animal, Tender Surrender, Warm Regards, Building The Church... to name a few....

here's the full article: http://www.thestar.com/article/679835
Toronto butcher Paul Bradshaw's phone has been ringing with calls from outraged family in Scotland, all wanting to tell him the offensive news: The English are now claiming they invented haggis.
Och aye, haggis, the Scots' national dish of sheep heart, liver and lungs cooked with oatmeal in the animal's stomach, the traditional meal immortalized by the much-beloved Scottish poet Robert Burns in "Address to a Haggis."
A food historian is stirring up the controversy after discovering a printed reference to haggis in a recipe book, The English Hus-Wife, from 1615. The earliest mention in a Scottish book was 1747. Burns' poem was written in 1786.
"It's ridiculous," says Bradshaw, who trained in Scotland with an award-winning haggis-maker. "I've only ever met two or three English people willing to eat it. Everyone in Scotland does.
"It'll blow over – depending on how angry the Scots get. They're pretty protective of their haggis."
Not since the British government banned the wearing of kilts and the playing of bagpipes after the defeat of Bonnie Prince Charlie in 1746 have the Scots been so distraught about their national symbols.
"This haggis grab is akin to a land grab and it's a sign of its culinary success now as a swanky dish," Alex Salmond, the First Minister of Scotland, told the Sunday Mail.
In a New York Times op-ed piece called "Keep Your Hands Off Our Haggis," Scottish author Alexander McCall Smith explained to Americans that this insult was comparable to claiming that apple pie and turkey with cranberry sauce were really French.
Scots in Toronto are also offal-ly steamed.
"It's a sign of the inherent weakness in the English character that leads them to try and appropriate successes created by other nations," says book publisher Douglas Gibson.
"You wait. They'll be inventing golf next and developing whisky. They have no shame."
"England is happy to take anything Scottish and call it their own," says Patricia Main, president of the St. Andrew's Society, a philanthropic Scottish cultural group.
"They took our king way back, our Stone of Destiny, now our haggis, too."
So why is this sheep-innards sausage so central to the Scots?
"It's an example of Scottish defiance, prickliness, to have a national dish that turns most people's stomachs," explains Gibson, named Canada's Scot of the Year in 2005.
"The point is that haggis is the really, really cheap parts of meat and really, really cheap to make, and very nourishing."
Over the years, the origins of Scotland's other national symbols, the kilt and bagpipes, have also been debated, says Graeme Morton, the Scottish studies fFoundation chair at the University of Guelph.
"National symbols only became important with the idea of a nation-state in the 18th century," he explains. "And that's when the Scots claimed the kilt, bagpipes and haggis as their own."
He is not convinced by a 1615 recipe book that haggis is English. "It's hard to chart food. Recipes are passed on, not written down."
At the University of Toronto, Andy Orchard, professor of English and medieval studies, finds it more compelling evidence, although he wants to be diplomatic. After all, his father is English and his mother Scots-Irish.
"I don't want to go against Robert Burns and that pudding they seem to adore," says Orchard. "But unless the Scots come up with anything earlier, too bad."
At the But 'n' Ben, a Scottish bakery in Pickering that also sells haggis, Helen Tannahill wonders if the pride of Highlands kitchens might actually date back to the Romans or Vikings.
She's not disturbed by the English claim.
"I've been here (in Canada) since I was 13. My Dad would be more upset," she says, handing the phone to her 83-year-old father, explaining to him a reporter says haggis might be English.
"You been eatin' cheese," says Alex Baird in a thick Scottish brogue. "That means you been dreamin'."

What he did was beyond wrong and inhumane. But does he not deserve a second chance?
I'm an animal lover for sure. Animals are much better than humans for many reasons...I won't go into that. But it seems to me the killing of an animal is considered a worse crime than killing a human being. Dany Heatley (of the Ottawa Senators) drove drunk and killed his buddy and team mate and it seems we've all forgotten about it and he's been playing hockey with no one making a big fuss for years.
I'm just saying....I'm no fan of his but if we were ever in his position we'd all hope for a second chance.

J.P Ricciardi is a dillhole and should have his eyes pecked out by pigeons.
This year alone with the Halladay fiasco and now practically giving Alex away...oh yeah...so they have more to spend on other players. But who the hell would want to play here with that dillhole as G.M? He's a slimey, weasel-faced, dillhole. WHY is he still G.M? Why? One good reason. I feel your pain slagfarmer.
A promising start gave us false hope...the World Series team reunion last week was what it was all about. When the Jays were untouchable.

the queen without a king replied to longdistancewinner's topic in Ramble On

I'm not looking to start a cyber spat with you. I know you're very opinionated and on occasion I do agree with some of your opinions. However, I think the above comment is harsh and unfair.
Nothing about his "extra-curriculars" was ever proven. He settled out of court. So? It may look like it was a gesture of guilt but again, MAYBE.
He had WAY too much plastic surgery and he looked like something out of a sci-fi movie. So? That automatically makes him a pedophile?
Naive? Yes he was. Very much so for not seeing things the way a grown man ought to.
An easy target for such accusations? Clearly.
Did he make BAD judgment calls? MANY times. Again it doesn't prove he was a child molester.
If he were an average looking Joe I think the split on his being guilty or not guilty would be more 50/50 but as it stands, we are a society the judges people on what they look like and we love to build someone up just to tear them down again. And I'm not trying to be a smart ass but if not for the reasons above, why do you believe the accusations about Michael Jackson's "extra-curriculars" to be true?
I am and have always been a Michael Jackson fan. Not an extreme fanatic but an admirer of his many talents. I am shocked and sad. I don't think he would have ever had a comeback tour that would have catapulted him to his former glory days, but I was hoping the tour he was about to start would be a success. I was hoping in time, the negativity/suspicion surrounding him would let up a bit so the focus could once again be on the brilliant performer/singer/songwriter he really was.